Comments on: Basic RAW Processing in digiKamhttps://scribblesandsnaps.com/2013/03/11/basic-raw-processing-in-digikam/
Linux, Open Source, PhotographyFri, 09 Dec 2016 18:00:50 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: GrueMasterhttps://scribblesandsnaps.com/2013/03/11/basic-raw-processing-in-digikam/#comment-6918
Tue, 12 Mar 2013 15:58:42 +0000http://scribblesandsnaps.com/?p=3221#comment-6918I think you are slightly missing the point of this article. While I agree that the Gimp is far more powerful for photo editing, I think the focus here is using one app to manage all of your photo needs (for most users).

I personally use both. If there is something I need to do that Digikam won’t do well (like removing date stamps off my mother’s digital photos), I switch to Gimp to process them individually. It takes more time, but I have more capabilities for that type of work.

I do like your brief tutorial of Gimp and UFRaw. Maybe you should post a full tutorial article on it.

]]>By: Albinhttps://scribblesandsnaps.com/2013/03/11/basic-raw-processing-in-digikam/#comment-6912
Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:56:26 +0000http://scribblesandsnaps.com/?p=3221#comment-6912Thanks for the article and the interesting comment by Spanky. I’ll be moving from an older version of PS Elements on XP, and want some equivalent quality tools without Java security issues. I’ve had GIMP/UFRaw for a while in Linux, and it has the advantage of Windows versions for consistency. Only recently learned of Digikam and it’s great to see a learner’s intro to it.
]]>By: Spankyhttps://scribblesandsnaps.com/2013/03/11/basic-raw-processing-in-digikam/#comment-6899
Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:02:49 +0000http://scribblesandsnaps.com/?p=3221#comment-6899Thanks for your work, but I have a differnt perspective.

The S90 lens is soft, and high ISO also takes away quality.

I have always found the Digikam Raw developers weak; when compared to ufraw. ufraw can work as an automatic compliment to Gimp, is that linking package (gimp-ufraw) is simply installed.

ufraw appears strange to new users who have not read the onilne ufraw page. Some people atempt to use it without loading their camera profile, as the ufraw page easily describes. Then, there’s a bunch of control in ufraw; but you never need to change all of them. Only a few, and only when needed.

What’s great is, with your camera profile, you can tweak your Raw file, to MATCH your preferred JPEG output (even on other camera brands; at the given sensor ability), and I am saying, just as soon as ufraw loads up your picture!

C. ufraw properly setup, and just the first time, loads your largely finished Raw job.

All the things you can do, are covered as the ufraw web page. You should understand, curves are the better, and more professional way to handle Raw changes. The first curve is more for large batches, and you can skip it, and twael the seconf curves, if needed, per picture. These “local contrast” edits, act like a per picture, D-Lighting, I-Exposure, or HDR adjustments; with your full Raw data(latitide). Watch a video on adjusting with curves, if you have never done it. THere is also an “eyedropper”, to set any white balance, that wasn’t alreaady set before you took the picture.

JPEG’s can go straight to Gimp, and Gimp has numerous plugins that you should install, for one click treatments. It’s a lot of power; but that’s exactly why Gimp is your one stop shop, for just about anything you would need, for you photo edit. Learn it well. It isn’t less, because it’s free to you. It is better, and at any price.

Raw files, if loaded with Gimp, with automatically go through ufraw, smoothly. Raw files loaded with ufraw, then has a Gimp button, taht automatically put the out put into Gimp; where you can eventually save/export it as your final JPEg (or whatever). You may of course, save you ufraw output, as a .PNG file; In case you wish to pass it through many, different editors (like for testing).

I especially like saving to JPEG, from Gimp; because Gimp automatically sets the JPEG compression level to it’s optimum (variable per photo) balance.